A Perforation Question...?

Hi guys...Here is a question I have been asking myself for years and still don't know why it is done...Lets take a look say at Scott #606 - 609 Christmas stamps.

These stamps below were printed all in 1972

Scott # 606 perforation - 12.5 x 12.0
Scott # 607 perforation - 12.5 x 12.0
Scott # 608 perforation - 11.0 x 10.8
Scott # 609 perforation - 11.0 x 10.8

Now here is my question...

Why does Canada Post change perforations not only from year to year, from stamp to stamp, and also as above half way through printing a Christmas set of stamps.

Is there some one in the organization talking to each other and saying..""you know Bert we have a brand new perforation machine that is different, hey, lets use it next time""

Ok, that might seem far fetched but I believe that me and you are probably paying for all these changes and new equipment being in this Crown organization. Why doesn't or why did they not just keep perforation the same for year after year..??

Some perforations are hard to tear off, like perforation 8's. Why did/don't they use say a 13 perforation or 12 as a constant standard forever.?

Can anyone enlighten me WHY perforations change so much...?

There are likely many reasons.....but one is that perforation is one way to distinguish otherwise identical stamps. For example a stamp released as a single and also as a souvenir sheet will likely have different perforations.

As in the case above, it all depends on the printer and not Canada Post. By 1972, there were several different printers printing Canadian stamps such as Canadian Bank Note (CBN), British American Banknote (BABN), Ashton-Potter (AP), etc. Some used different perforations from each other and others used the same perforations. In the above examples that you have listed, the 12.5 x 12.0 perforations were used on the smaller stamps with panes of 100 (and larger stamps of double size in one direction horizontally or vertically with panes of 50) and the 11.00 x 10.8 perforations were used on the larger stamps with panes of 50. This pattern was used by Ashton Potter for their stamps that had the same exact dimensions. It appears that the perforation plate pattern (or perforation cylinder pattern) was already pin preset and hole pre-drilled for such patterns based on the size of stamps. Some pins could be removed at times so that stamps that were double in size could be accommodated in one direction horizontally or vertically with the same perforation which was based on the spacing of pins and holes between each other. Also, the perforating machines were usually made by companies that were not the printers. If you are studying perforations, it is best to first divide the stamps according to different printers first and to get different examples of perforations made by them. Then one can compare perforations between printers too. If different printers have the same perforations, then it may come from similar machines from the same manufacturer.

I can see what you guys are saying, but Canada Post are the people buying a product and this is where they request (a good easy to tear off perforation) what THEY want in there products and not what the supplier decides to give them...Some people (and stamp collectors) complained that say a perf. 8 does cause the odd tear in a stamp, then why not demand that these printing companies use a perforation the is easy, standardized and customer friendly..??

I think this is an interesting topic, thank you Wert for opening this discussion.

We seem to keep coming back to something that I have seen very little about; what are the actual specifications used by postal systems for their stamps. Surely the type of paper, adhesive properties, dimensions, perforations, etc. are not simply left to chance (or left to some printers best guess).

Generally speaking I would expect a technical drawing or other documented specification would be used to gather quotes from various sub-contractors. For obvious reasons this documentation is important so the postal service can compare apples-to-apples when making the final decision on the best quote. This is also the 'go to' document for inspection of the final product at delivery.

For us collectors this document become critical in our understanding of what is, and isn't, a 'correct' stamp. In my opinion any stamp that does not fall within the tolerances in the specification is the only thing we should consider an actual 'error' or EFO.

Has anyone ever seen a postal service drawing or other document specification for a stamp? They would usually be included in a RFQ package (Request For Quote). They would contain specs for things like 'color fastness' and other technical requirements like perforations.
don

CanadaStamp..That statement only holds true for stamp collectors to distinguish between stamps..I really dont think Canada Post had the in mind..

It may be possible that the perforations are different so that the perforations themselves align correctly to fit the size of the stamp.

Minesweeper..We have stamps that are identical in size in Canada and some are perf. 12 and some are perf. 8....That does not make to much sense as to the answer I am looking for..Know what I mean..??

I would have to agree that the perfs are different for type of issue. Not relevent to the year.

Leopold Beaudet has written much about modern perforations on Canadian stamps. Also, it appears that they may have been made from two drilled perforating flat plates. They are both drilled with a predetermined equal spacing between holes and with a predetermined number of total holes. Then pins are added to one of the plates according to the pattern desired from the available holes. There is flexibility in that pins can be added or subtracted for smaller subjects or bigger subjects. Some stamps are half the size or double the size for a 100 or 50 subject plate with the same perforations. See: Ashton-Potter (AP) Canada # 606-607, pane of 100 stamps, perf 12.5 x 12.0 and # 623-624, pane of 50 stamps, perf 12.0 x 12.5 which were all perforated from the same plate. However, the bigger stamps were made from two smaller stamps by taking the pins between them out and the subjects were turned 90 degrees in orientation from horizontal to vertical. I mostly am interested in older line perforating (imperfectly crossing perforations) rather than in modern bulls eye perforating (perfectly crossing perforations) so that the above information on modern perforations is based on what I know, but it may have been done using two curved plate cylinders instead of two flat plates.

I believe that the perforations are different for each contract printer and that this done on purpose by the USPS so that they can identify the printer of any given stamp at any time. The microprinting is different for each printer for the same reason.

The other specifications, type and weight of paper, tack, adhesion, type of ink, etc., would be the same for an RFQ package to be submitted to all candidate printers. The type of color separations prepared from the original master would heavily influence the final choice of printer. It would be the eye of the USPS to decide which best matches their perception of the original for color, color balance, hue, intensity, etc.

I assume Canada Post is much the same as the USPS.

Donald